State v. Powell
Ohio Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceHarsha, Judge
{¶ 49} Powell’s primary defense was based upon her claim that Officer Mayle was exaggerating the nature of her conduct in an attempt to deflect attention from his own incompetence in allowing Handa to escape. In other words, she claimed that she did not assist Handa’s escape from detention in any purposeful way and that Mayle was lying; and that he used the lies to excuse his own failure to follow proper protocol, which led to Handa’s escape. The trial court incorrect ly interpreted Powell’s strategy as an attempt to use an irregularity in obtaining or maintaining Handa’s detention as an…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. DavisOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- State v. HarknessOhio Court of Appeals · 1991